A court can review parties' requests for computer searches of electronically stored information pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 and restrict the scope of the initial searches. The parties indicated to the court that they made an attempt, in good faith, to resolve a discovery dispute about electronically stored documents and information and were unable to reach agreement. The plaintiff requests 435 search terms, which are expected to produce approximately 50,201 e-mails and 6,140 additional documents. The defendants objected that search terms should be restricted to 118 of the most relevant search terms about health plans, formulas of drugs and pharmacies. The court granted the defendant's request to restrict the plaintiff's initial search to 118 terms, as opposed to 435 terms, plus the search term "specialty." As discovery continues, the plaintiff may request additional searches. In connection with the defendant's counterclaims, the defendant apparently requests eight types of searches that would produce approximately 92,112 documents. The plaintiff objects that the initial electronic search for the defendant's counterclaims should be restricted to three types of searches that would produce 13,412 documents. The plaintiff, which argues that Ralph Pisano will not be a key witness, posits that a search for documents related to Ralph Pisano may not be required. The defendant objects that Pisano is a "key witness." The court granted the plaintiff's request to restrict the defendant's initial search to three types of searches that will produce 13,412 documents. As discovery continues, the defendant may request additional searches. The court ordered counsel to make a good-faith attempt to narrow the search terms for any additional requests for electronic searches.

VIEW FULL CASE